In the gliederung below some unit are followed by (bo.), what does this signify?
Some units have Reste in front of them; I loosely translate this to mean what remains of the unit. Is that an appropriate translation? Also, if this is notation indicates that there is only a small portion of the original unit that remains how reduced does a unit have to be to qualify for this notation?
Richard, bodenständige indicates a static unit, not mobile. Reste indicates the remainder or remnants of a unit depending on context. I'm not sure if your example indicates the main body, or literally the remnants of those units.
Can someone confirm the contextual use of Reste in this case? and again if this is the remains of a diminished unit at what level does the unit have to be to get notated in this way.
I agree with Tom on the context of "reste". This seems to appear mainly with units that were smashed in battle. If I am not mistaken "teile" ("tiele" ?) is used to indicate a part of an otherwise more or less intact unit.
I may be trying to get more from the Reste notation than is possible but I was tiring to ascertain if this notation could be used to roughly estimate capacity of a unit or at what threshold could it start to be used.
Along the same lines what does the mobility capacity have to be reduced to for the bo. notation to be used? I know some of the divisions may have been static from the onset but some seem to acquire this designation after time on the front line.
Also, is there any significance to the use of the “+” signs between units? Because of their diminished capacity were these units combined to work as a single unit or am I reading too much into that? The “+” signs are not always used and when they are they seem to string weaker units together
I do not know at what specific stage of diminishing combat strength the Reste appellation was attached. It was applied to units of virtually no combat strength at all, usually applied just very remnants of combat elements and usually relatively intact divisional support and service units after a major defeat of the division involved.
The designation K.-Gr. (Kampfgruppe) is not an indication of size, but of non-permanent composition.
Mobility was assigned upon raising of the division. I have never seen a regular (i.e., mobile) unit be converted to static (bodenständig) without specific orders. Even when Panzer divisions were all but equipped with horse drawn vehicles, it still remained a Panzer division.
The Gliederungen (order of battle) do not always show the complete designation or type of the unit, as it was assumed that the division was known by its number as to type.
Some few static (bo.) units (either parts of or whole divisions) were made "mobile" by assigning bicycles, horses, horse drawn vehicles, and even a sprinkling of motor vehicles, with their corresponding operators, on an ad-hoc basis. It still remained a (bo.) unit. Theoretically, specific orders from the OKH Organizational Department were needed before the appellation could be changed.
The '+' symbol indicates the subordinated, attached status of the units following it. In the diagram above, the Reste 17. Lw.=F. and the Reste 331. and the Reste 334. (bo.) are all subordinated to the 711. (bo.).
Leo many thanks for the detailed reply, I really appreciate it. The reason behind my question of the bo. status was that the 49.ID was indicated as bo. yet its October 1 1944 divisional Gliederung shows about 2500 horses authorized, which seemed a contradiction but then I don’t know how many horses a static division is authorized. Also after a careful look at several high level Gliderung I realized that as you indicated the bo. status never changed.
If I remember correctly, the 47, 48 and 49th divisions were raised in early 1944 as Bo. units. Some of the Bo. units were given some mobility by addition of horses and such as Leo said. I think FMS-B-004 talks about this in the case of the 719th division.
By and large - it didnt help much. Most of the upgraded Bo. units (84, 85, 89, 47, 48, 49, etc) were overrrun leaving only remnants.
Christoph thanks for the reply and sorry for my late acknowledgement, truth is I did not notice your reply until I came back to the post today to read it again and make some notes. My fault for reading and responding to posts from work.
If the Reste carries no significance with regard to manpower what does it try to tell us about the unit then? Does it imply a reduced strength but no specific reduction?
With regards to the .bo sample see below although I realize now that this is likely a clerical error and not a real change in designation.
I appreciate the reply as it helps me to better understand the documents.
84, 85 and 89 were no static divisions. These divisions were part of the 25. Welle, and were organised with the same Inf.Div. n.A.-KStN as the divisions of the 21. and 22. Welle (349, 352, 353 etc and 271., 272., etc).
Most of the static divisions in the west were partially converted (or at least tried to convert) to the Inf.DIv. 44 standard.
346. I.D. is such an example.
However, the timeframe in which those static divisions were ordered from being a static division for several years into the more mobile Inf.Div. 44 was too short (2 weeks to acquire bicycles and "drafted" foreign trucks etc.).
Coming back to 49 Inf. Div: According to Burkhart Mueller-Hillebrand, this unit indeed was upgraded, the correct German term being "Umgliederung". The time frame indicated is autum 1944 and going by the Gliederung of 49 Inf. Div., this must have happened in September 1944. Unfortunately, the Akte H1/38 (downloadable at your sturmpanzer.com) that normaly is a good source for late war restructuring doesn't contain this order (or at least I haven't found it). The one order from 9. Oktober 1944 doing the same to the remaining 5 Divisions in the West (out of can however been found there, also the order dated 5.12.1944 dissolving the 49. Inf. Division (also here referred to as normal Inf.Div without the addeded bodenständig). The unit originally was raised as bodenständig as an Umgliederung of 191. Reserve Division in Boulogne, France, the order dating back to November 1943.
Cheers
Hans
The 49. Inf.Div. was raised as a static (“bo.”) formation on 1 February 1944 from the 191. Res.Div.
The division was annihilated at Mons on 2 September 1944. The remnants (“Reste”) were collected at Aachen on 7 September 1944 and formed into a Kampfgruppe.
[Going by Han's post, the reformed division was supposed to be a "regular" infantry division. But the further fate of the division probably precluded reorganization to any large degree. ]
On 21 October 1944, the Fest.MG-Btl. 57, Westheer-Inf.Btl. 302 and 305 (these two also formed from remnants of various dispersed units) were added. On 28 October 1944, the Fest.MG-Btl. 31, Fest.Inf.Btl. 1423, Gren.Ers.&Ausb.Btl. 78, as well as the Luftwaffe.Fest.Btl. I, VI, XI, and XVIII were also incorporated into the KG 49. Inf.Div. (A total of 10 battalions).
[Obviously it no longer was a "regular" static formation after September, but rather a Kampfgruppe of very mixed provenance, and hence no longer carried the "bo." appellation.]
After being again wiped out at Aachen, the remnants were incorporated into the 246. VG-Div. towards the end of October, early November 1944.
Tessin, “Verbände und Truppen …”, Vol. 5 [my comments]
My fault for reading and responding to posts from work.
can however been found there, also the order dated 5.12.1944 dissolving the 49. Inf. Division (also here referred to as normal Inf.Div without the addeded bodenständig). The unit originally was raised as bodenständig as an Umgliederung of 191. Reserve Division in Boulogne, France, the order dating back to November 1943.